"conservative social views"? How about adhering to the Constitution, which is black-letter law, instead of what some people think the founders might have thought?
(A conjecture that is likely incorrect, since they assume that the Founders were charismatic Christians)
Hint: Marriage is not the basis of our society. LIBERTY is the basis of our society.
Fair enough. Guess you're real happy about the election last week. I wish I understood the perspective that safety is more important than freedom. It would let me stop shrieking every time this administration does something for my own good.
Me, I'm going to vomit when Bush announces Ashcroft's appointment to the Supreme Court. Then we'll be REALLY screwed.
The world did not, repeat, did not change on 9/11. The only difference between 9/11 and the previous terrorist attack on the WTC is that this one worked. The universe is unchanged.
YOUR PERSPECTIVE changed, but that means it was broken to begin with. You're still more likely to be bitten by a shark than killed by a terrorist.
Like what? What needed to be changed? FBI had the data. They just didn't process it. THEY screwed up. Why are MY liberties being infringed? Why is the writ of habeas corpus GONE? Why am I no longer free to donate to charities? Why am I under intese scrutiny when I go into an airport?
None of these things solve the problem. Hell, we still only examine less than 5% of the container traffic into US Ports. Want better security? Why don't you look at things the size of a BOXCAR that get shipped to all points in this country with no examination whatsoever.
Other countries are not the Gold Standard of civil liberties. The Constitution is the Gold Standard of civil liberties, and it's being shredded.
That's the problem. We don't need to become less free to be safe. We're already much safer from terrorism than we are from getting eaten by sharks, so "safe" is not an issue.
The issue is control, and that should ALWAYS be resisted.
Are these the computer recycling companies that are shipping stuff to China and hiring children to melt down the parts to realize your "very good source for materials"?
Yeah. There's a good solution to the problem.
OF COURSE you should use hardware for as long as it's serviceable. But using it just to use it doesn't make sense. Use it to solve problems, or give it to people who will.
I'm not saying it's not a problem. It certainly is, to some degree. I'm saying that an insignificant fraction of the population buys new video cards. Fun thought experiment: Divide the number of video card upgrades by the number of people named "Chang". You will get a number very close to zero.
I'd love to buy a computer that was manufactured in a not-environmentally-hostile manner. However, with our current technology, that is not possible.
On the list of things that humans do that are bad for the environment, upgrading a new video card (which the average human does, well, NEVER) is a little bit lower than exhaling carbon dioxide (which the average human does a lot).
Wow. Your sig is so boldly and simply stated, it has convinced me to completely change my worldview and make it the same as yours. Thank you for Saving me from my lifetime of ignorance and wrongheadedness.
Do I talk to you about getting a slot in the Rapture?
And sometimes those re-releases are good, and sometimes they're bad. It doesn't address the point at all.
The new Ocean's Eleven was infinitely superior to the Brat Pack debacle. I enjoyed the new Italian Job thoroughly, and for totally different reasons than I liked the old one.
I'm not arguing that these are cinematic masterworks...but they don't have to be. They're fun movies.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't speak for anybody else, but I criticize MS for their illegal business practices.
Why would I bother to try their browser? It doesn't run on the platform I prefer.
Why do you care? Seriously. Don't like IE? Don't use it. Why worry about what they do or do not think is a competitive threat?
Huh?
Right, because if you don't have a bank account, you probably shouldn't be voting anyway.
HUH!?
"conservative social views"? How about adhering to the Constitution, which is black-letter law, instead of what some people think the founders might have thought?
(A conjecture that is likely incorrect, since they assume that the Founders were charismatic Christians)
Hint: Marriage is not the basis of our society. LIBERTY is the basis of our society.
Yeah, because the Parties' track records are so much better.
I'd rather have the elections run by the Boy Scouts.
Yeah, because THAT was where Adams broke my suspension of disbelief. Everything else was pretty darn plausible!
*rolls eyes*
What rational discussion can you have with a person who insists that an undetectable supernatural being has revealed His Will to them?
I believe in God, but I don't argue that my belief is rational. That makes it no less valid: It's just not rational.
Fair enough. Guess you're real happy about the election last week. I wish I understood the perspective that safety is more important than freedom. It would let me stop shrieking every time this administration does something for my own good.
Me, I'm going to vomit when Bush announces Ashcroft's appointment to the Supreme Court. Then we'll be REALLY screwed.
Where do I check stock forecasts for "the long run"? I only see options for next quarter, or maybe next year.
Does that answer your question?
I've staked my points on the Bill of Rights, which used to be a pretty important document in this country.
Where is YOUR ground?
The world did not, repeat, did not change on 9/11. The only difference between 9/11 and the previous terrorist attack on the WTC is that this one worked. The universe is unchanged.
YOUR PERSPECTIVE changed, but that means it was broken to begin with. You're still more likely to be bitten by a shark than killed by a terrorist.
Like what? What needed to be changed? FBI had the data. They just didn't process it. THEY screwed up. Why are MY liberties being infringed? Why is the writ of habeas corpus GONE? Why am I no longer free to donate to charities? Why am I under intese scrutiny when I go into an airport?
None of these things solve the problem. Hell, we still only examine less than 5% of the container traffic into US Ports. Want better security? Why don't you look at things the size of a BOXCAR that get shipped to all points in this country with no examination whatsoever.
I sure have seen that list. What's your point?
"But for pretty much everything most people do (except games), a five-year-old computer works just as well as a new one"
You're free to make your determination for one person on this planet: Yourself.
I don't give my computers to you to recycle them.
And I'm not arguing that we restrict computer upgrades based on ridiculous pseudo-environmentalism.
If you take it personally, maybe you should consider a different line of work.
Yeah, it's not YOUR fault you do business with people that are a small step up from slavers. After all, it's just business, right?
So should people call you to find out if they're allowed to use new machines? What's your home phone number?
Anybody who thinks they get to pick what other people should be allowed to do is, a priori, wrong.
Other countries are not the Gold Standard of civil liberties. The Constitution is the Gold Standard of civil liberties, and it's being shredded.
That's the problem. We don't need to become less free to be safe. We're already much safer from terrorism than we are from getting eaten by sharks, so "safe" is not an issue.
The issue is control, and that should ALWAYS be resisted.
Should they check in with you before they upgrade? You know, to find out when they "should"?
Are these the computer recycling companies that are shipping stuff to China and hiring children to melt down the parts to realize your "very good source for materials"?
Yeah. There's a good solution to the problem.
OF COURSE you should use hardware for as long as it's serviceable. But using it just to use it doesn't make sense. Use it to solve problems, or give it to people who will.
Define "servicable". Do YOU want to use them?
I'm not saying it's not a problem. It certainly is, to some degree. I'm saying that an insignificant fraction of the population buys new video cards. Fun thought experiment: Divide the number of video card upgrades by the number of people named "Chang". You will get a number very close to zero.
I'd love to buy a computer that was manufactured in a not-environmentally-hostile manner. However, with our current technology, that is not possible.
"bad for the environment"?
On the list of things that humans do that are bad for the environment, upgrading a new video card (which the average human does, well, NEVER) is a little bit lower than exhaling carbon dioxide (which the average human does a lot).
Get some perspective.
Wow. Your sig is so boldly and simply stated, it has convinced me to completely change my worldview and make it the same as yours. Thank you for Saving me from my lifetime of ignorance and wrongheadedness.
Do I talk to you about getting a slot in the Rapture?
And sometimes those re-releases are good, and sometimes they're bad. It doesn't address the point at all.
The new Ocean's Eleven was infinitely superior to the Brat Pack debacle. I enjoyed the new Italian Job thoroughly, and for totally different reasons than I liked the old one.
I'm not arguing that these are cinematic masterworks...but they don't have to be. They're fun movies.